II

Larry Heil, FHWA October 15, 2003

Environmental StreamliningEnvironmental Streamlining

Why integrate planning into Why integrate planning into NEPA?NEPA?

Hoosier Heartland Corridor Study – 1995Ohio River MIS (ORMIS) - 1997US 231 & SR 641 FEIS/ROD – 2000Indiana NEPA/404 Merger Agreement was

a limited success

Desired OutcomeDesired Outcome

ONE decision-making process that is efficient, inclusive, structured, that resolves issues as early as possible, and results in high-quality transportation decisions and NEPA documents

Why integrate planning into Why integrate planning into NEPA?NEPA?

Section 1308 of TEA-21 (June 9, 1997), entitled Major Investment Study (MIS) Integration – shall eliminate the MIS as a separate

requirement, and– integrate the MIS requirement into NEPA

Why integrate planning into Why integrate planning into NEPA?NEPA?

Section 1309 of TEA-21 (June 9, 1997), entitled Environmental Streamlining – Develop/Implement coordinated environmental

review process– Environmental reviews for all Federal permits

& approvals conducted concurrently– Establish time frames for reviews– Dispute Resolution

How did Indiana integrate How did Indiana integrate planning into NEPA?planning into NEPA?

Environmental Streamlining Task Group – 1st Draft and agency expectations/issues

discussed at January 19, 2001 Meeting– 2nd Draft and response to agency comments

discussed at February26, 2001 Meeting– 3rd Draft and 30-minute presentation on each

active EISs and EA/Corridor Studies presented at March 28-29,2001 Interagency Meeting

– Final EIS Procedures issued July 6, 2001

Basic Elements of EIS Basic Elements of EIS ProceduresProcedures

Establish “Project Coordination Team” to provide a structured mechanism for INDOT, FHWA-IN, and the MPO to guide consultant EIS development

Eliminate the duplication of effort between planning and NEPA studies (eliminate MIS, per Section 1308 of TEA-21)

Basic Elements of EIS Basic Elements of EIS Procedures (cont.)Procedures (cont.)

Provide a structured interagency coordination process with deadlines and a dispute resolution process (per Section 1309 of TEA-21)

Seek agency input at key decision pointsResult in timely decisions that avoid project

delay

Key Coordination Points with Key Coordination Points with AgenciesAgencies

Required: NOI (early coordination), DEIS, FEIS, ROD

Three Interagency Review Meetings: – Purpose and Need/Preliminary Alternatives– Preliminary Alternatives Analysis and

Screening– Preferred Alternative and Mitigation

Interagency Review MeetingsInteragency Review Meetings

Face-to-face meetings with agencies held 30 days into 60-day review period

Minutes documenting issues sent 7 days after meeting.

Any remaining agency issues may be submitted in writing by the deadline

Purpose and Need and Purpose and Need and Preliminary AlternativesPreliminary Alternatives

Purpose and Need Package:– 2-page summary – Core objectives & evaluation criteria– Map of conceptual alternatives– Discuss study area problems/issues– Supporting documentation/details

Purpose and Need and Purpose and Need and Preliminary Alternatives(cont.)Preliminary Alternatives(cont.)Seeking agency feedback on:

– Statement of core project objectives– Evaluation criteria for alternatives– Additional alternatives– Modification of existing alternatives– Specific resource issues– Response to FHWA invitation to be

Cooperating Agency

Preliminary Alternatives Preliminary Alternatives Analysis and ScreeningAnalysis and Screening

Preliminary Alternatives Analysis and Screening Package:– Revised 2-page P&N– Alternatives Screening Summary Table– Map of alternatives retained/discarded– Preliminary alternatives analysis (GIS)– Rationale for dropping/retaining alternatives– Scope of special studies

Preliminary Alternatives Preliminary Alternatives Analysis and Screening Analysis and Screening

(cont.)(cont.)Seeking agency feedback on:

– Clarity of preliminary alternatives analysis– Alternatives retained– Methodologies for evaluating impacts– Scope of study needed for critical impacts

Preferred Alternative and Preferred Alternative and MitigationMitigation

Package:– 2-page summary with map– Summary of major public and agency issues

and responses– Recommended Selected Action with rationale– Preliminary proposed mitigation

Preferred Alternative and Preferred Alternative and Mitigation (cont.)Mitigation (cont.)

Seek Agency Feedback on:– Response to agency issues– Rationale for selecting Preferred Alternative

and not others

EA/Corridor Study vs. EISEA/Corridor Study vs. EIS

INDOT/MPO Funding CommitmentClarity from INDOT and MPO 20-year

Transportation PlansCongressionally Mandated Feasibility

StudyNew Transit Start

Option 1 – Planning in Context Option 1 – Planning in Context of EISof EIS

NOI P&N Interagency

Meeting Preliminary

Alternatives Analysis and Screening Interagency Meeting

DEIS

Preferred Alternative and Mitigation Interagency Meeting

FEIS/ROD Final Design

Option 2 – Planning in Context Option 2 – Planning in Context of EA/Corridor Studyof EA/Corridor Study

Early Coordination Letter

P&N Interagency Meeting

Preliminary Alternatives Analysis and Screening Interagency Meeting

EA/Corridor Study

NOI DEIS Preferred Alternative

and Mitigation Interagency Meeting

FEIS/ROD Final Design

Contacts Contacts

Janice Osadczuk

INDOT

Josadczuk@indot.state.in.us

317-232-5468

Virginia LaszewskiUSEPA - Region 5Laszewski.virginia@epa.gov312-886-7501

Larry HeilFHWA-INLarry.heil@fhwa.dot.gov317-226-7491